add details of 123377 to thompson Creek

[NewGraphEnvironment]

• [x] We should add a note that the site was revisited in 2022 (upstream of 198066 and downstream of 123377), add the site to the hab con spreadsheet (leave it in 2022 though) and summarize the site that was done there (surveyed in a downsteam direction from the bridge (123378) to the start of the agricultural fields) and add the UAV imagery.
• [x] Note in the background about Fishpan Lake
• [x] Map link should be switched to this one manually https://hillcrestgeo.ca/outgoing/fishpassage/projects/bulk/FishPassage_093L.114.pdf
• [x] note that downstream of lowest culvert was surveyed to the confluence with bulkley side channel
• [x] Have a peak at the above map when writing the following detail in the background. Need to note that the main flow of the stream is actually through an open bottomed culvert at 123376.
• [x] Have a look at the GPS tracks to see where was surveyed and describe. I think I did both channels for some distance.
• [x] For upstream of 123378 - Add the culvert summary table and photos for 123376. Also add 123381 (or 123380) - not sure which one is in the system as the culvert but it should be noted in the text that the other one doesn't exist
• [x] Note that surveyors could not access 123381 or 123380 as they were on private land behind gates however these sites are not expected to have much influence on connectivity in the watershed as the main body of flow in Thompson Creek actually flows to the east of there and through the channel that connects with 123376
• [ ] note that 123382 was also assessed and add the culvert summary

[Mateo9569]

Can you post links of the UAV imagery you did last year so I can put in memo?

[NewGraphEnvironment]

We should definitely pull the recommendation to move that stream to the north.

Text to potentially include:

The lidar shows evidence of extensive machine work to prevent the channel from flooding the agricultural fields that are on the floodplain of the Bulkley River as well as to drain the water that appears to inundate the wetlands to the south of the property. During field assessments it was noted that there was significant clearing of mature cottonwood forest adjacent to the side channel of the Bulkley River adjacent to 198066.

Recommendations (in addition to other ones that still make sense):

1. work with landowner and regulators to develop a plan for removing agricultural area from sections of the floodplain to re-establish riparian forest adjacent to Thompson Creek as well as the Bulkley River and side channels. Additionally, retention of water within floodplain wetland complexes should be encouraged.
2. Electrofishing above and below crossing 123377 and tagging with Passive Integrated Transponders (PIT tags) to gather baseline data before a potential replacement of the structure, track the movement of fish in the system over time and to give an indication of whether anadromous species are able to ascend through the rangelands adjacent to the Bulkley River floodplain.

[NewGraphEnvironment]

Other notes to add

• [x] in 2022, in addition to surveying the wetted channel from the bridge (insert PSCIS id) to where the stream directs to the south and the agricultural fields begin, surveyors walked the north edge of the field towards the Bulkley river for (insert approximate distance from track) then circled back south through the shrub dominated areas to the hay fields to scope for evidence that a defined historic channel was located in this area. Although some low lying areas were observed no defined channel was located which is not surprising since this area is all within the floodplain of the Bulkley River so channels/wetland complexes would historically shift throughout the floodplain based on beaver activity and flows in both Thompson Creek and the Bulkley River.
• [x] put a bit of detail about what where lidar is not available.
• [x] reveiw of lidar imagery for areas between Walcott Road to areas upstream of 123376 (open bottome structure on Hwy xx and 123375 (culvert/s on Hwy 16) show extensive anthropogenic excavations upstream of 123375 likely draining extensive areas of likely low lying wetlands to accomodate agricultural fields. Multiple ditch lines transect the area upstream of the hiway beginning from ~175m to the west of bridge (?) crossing 123379 adn terminating just jupstrream of 123375.....
• [x] incorperate latest lidar tile that shows upstream of hwy into the upstream figure.
• [x] See if lidar upstream of bc_093l057_xli1m_utm09_2019 is helpful
• [x] specifically state that the mainstem is mapped as crossing the highway at crossing xxxxx.
• [x] explain where specifically 123381 and 123380 are
• [x] explain where 123382 is in relation to the other crossings (ex. 4km or whatever upstream and 1.3km or whatever below the outlet of fishpan lake

[NewGraphEnvironment]

• [x] Fishpan Lake size (whse_basemapping.fwa_lakes_poly) should be mentioned along with its location in relation to the crossings we assessed. in the last PR it said it was downstream of 123383 but that site is not discussed elsewhere and really it is upstream of that crossing. it is the job of the GIS tech to take complicated settings and simplify them into a relevant context for the user.
• [x] when talking about areas it is best to include general locations of things (ie. east of Highway 16) vs just upstream of pscis crossing ids alone as it is much easier for the reader to understand where we are talking about without them needing to leave the text and reference figures and external maps
• [x] need description of where hwy 16 crossing is in site location section
• [x] when possible we will now always reference chris_culvert_ids to tie our work to MoTi database IDs.
• [x] details of the OBS on highway 16 belongs in the section about habitat upstreawm of Walcott road culvert and details about the crossing way up by the lake should go in section about area above walcott or section about hab upstream of the hwy CBS.
• [x] photos should be referenced in order of appearance. First photo referenced is the first photo on the page.
• [x] use functions to pull data from the habitat_confirmations.xls spreadsheet vs handbombing and populate missing data from photos. Add a disclaimer to the comments when data needs to be populated from photos. site3 hasd no info on how big the channel is and gradients are not included or not correct while the data is sitting there. there are numerous examples of functions that pull out the data without needing to rely on fpr_my_habitat_paragraph
• [x] We need to edit the writing from the spreadsheets and not just copy and paste into the reports. as fun as words like "fantastic" are, we use standardized terms to describe habitat. Mixed can be defined as mixed coniferous and deciduous forest. "Great shape" and "great water levels" can be suitable to describe hab on a field form (I guess...) but we take it formal when we transcribe
• [x] when we link a mapsheet by hand we still use the archive filename because the maps get updated overtime and we want the link to be stable to show our watershed area, fish info, priorities etc. (ex. https://hillcrestgeo.ca/outgoing/fishpassage/projects/bulk/archive/2022-09-06/FishPassage_093L.114.pdfvs https://hillcrestgeo.ca/outgoing/fishpassage/projects/bulk/FishPassage_093L.114.pdf)
• [x] when we link a mapsheet by hand we still use the name of the mapsheet at the link (ex. 093L.114) because it gives the user more information than just "here"
• [x] need to look for all sites in the background reports for it being prioritized in the past. only Walcott was mentioned by 123375 on the highway has also been prioritized by Wilson and Rabnett (noted in Irvine 2018)
• [x] context of sites in larger watershed is important. name the road (McNeil) that 123382 is on and mention the bridge and road just below fishpan lake
• [x] elevation minimum is higher than the site elevation.... need to pull
• [x] add the cost estimate information!
• [x] include the recommnedations!
• [x] add details of where things are to the photos

[lucy-schick]

closing in favour of #47